https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272413 Civil court jurisdiction is not excluded unless a statute expressly or clearly impliedly bars it, and the Bhopal State Land Revenue Act, 1932 did not bar a suit for declaration of title and possession because its revenue provisions did not authorise adjudication of title. Entries in the register of rights were only presumptive evidence of possession or title; they did not bind the civil court or make revenue proceedings conclusive. After amendment, the claim for possession was governed by Article 142 of the Limitation Act, and the suit was within time on the findings recorded. The appeal therefore failed and the decree for the respondents was affirmed. en-us Mon, 21 Feb 1966 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 May 2018 15:09:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272413 Civil court jurisdiction is not excluded unless a statute expressly or clearly impliedly bars it, and the Bhopal State Land Revenue Act, 1932 did not bar a suit for declaration of title and possession because its revenue provisions did not authorise adjudication of title. Entries in the register of rights were only presumptive evidence of possession or title; they did not bind the civil court or make revenue proceedings conclusive. After amendment, the claim for possession was governed by Article 142 of the Limitation Act, and the suit was within time on the findings recorded. The appeal therefore failed and the decree for the respondents was affirmed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 21 Feb 1966 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272413